WHY ARE WE EVEN HAVING THIS DISCUSSION?

At The Washington Post, Ryan Cooper says he has a "grand bargain" idea that Republicans and Democrats might actually agree on, because it doesn't involve tax increases, which Republicans have made clear are unacceptable to them:

... it might be possible to move past this point. The way to do it would be for Dems to ask for a different concession from Republicans, such as a huge boost in infrastructure spending to get the economy going again, and give them tax cuts in exchange for it....

Such an offer would throw the incoherence of the Republican budget position into sharp relief.... I'd wager that if the offered tax cuts were big and juicy enough, Republicans would conveniently forget all about their balanced budget mania (just like they did in the Bush years) and might be ready for some good old logrolling.

This deal would be quite a long shot. But it's got a better chance that anything that hinges on tax increases.... In fact, probably the biggest roadblock to such a deal would be President Obama, who seems to actually value his deficit reduction quite highly.

Atrios picks up on that last point:

I'll Take That Deal!

But, of course, Obama wouldn't, because as Ryan says, he seems to love his deficit reduction. I always joke that nobody cares about the deficit, but the truth is Obama is probably the exception to that. I have no idea why.

In fact, the president made an offer very similar to Cooper's earlier this year, in an appearance at an Amazon distribution center in Tennessee (remember?), and -- imagine my amazement -- he was smacked down by Republicans:

Obama offers 'grand bargain' on corporate tax rate, infrastructure

President Barack Obama proposed a "grand bargain for middle-class jobs" on Tuesday that would cut the U.S. corporate tax rate and use billions of dollars in revenues generated by a business tax overhaul to fund projects aimed at creating jobs....

The president's plan combined a proposed corporate tax rate cut - desired by Republicans - with new spending on infrastructure projects like roads and bridges as well as education investment - desired by his fellow Democrats....

Despite the olive branch, Obama's proposal immediately drew fire from the top Republicans in Congress. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said, "It's just a further-left version of a widely panned plan he already proposed two years ago - this time, with extra goodies for tax-and-spend liberals."

Boehner shot it down, too:

While the president presented the proposal as a concession, Republicans dismissed it more acidly than usual. "It's the opposite of a concession," said Brendan Buck, a spokesman for Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio.

In the Republicans’ view, Mr. Obama's offer was less of a "grand bargain" than an effort to extract a new fiscal stimulus program with money from a corporate tax cut that would end up, for accounting reasons, initially generating billions of dollars of revenue for the government.

Obama's infrastructure proposals always go nowhere with the GOP -- for instance, in 2011:

House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chair John Mica (R-Fla.) tossed cold water on Obama's call for a national infrastructure bank Thursday night, just minutes after the president told Congress to put partisanship aside and pass his plan quickly.

"We've already had experience with some of these federal grant programs that requires Washington bureaucrats, Washington red tape, Washington approvals and then bowing and scraping to Washington. I'm strongly opposed to any type of a new federal infrastructure bank," Mica said in an interview following the speech.

Asked and answered. If you want to see a complete list of the Obama tax or spending proposals Republicans would accept, pull out a blank sheet of paper and stare at it. That's the complete list.